CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench(2012) 01 KAR CK 0085

The Managing Director, North Eastern Karnataka Road Transport Corporation (NEKRTC) vs Ramappa @ Gonappa and Others

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 11 January 2012

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ravi Malimath, J
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous First Appeal No. 8435 Of 2008 (MV)
Download PDFAsk AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 358 words

Ravi Malimath

1.

At the request of both counsels, this matter is taken up for final disposal since the records are received. Aggrieved by the Judgment and award dated 10-6-2008 passed in MVC.No. 228/2004 by the Civil Judge (Senior Division) and Additional MACT, Challakere, the first respondent before the Tribunal has filed the present appeal questioning its liability to satisfy the award.

2.

In the instant case, the bus was hired by the appellant from the 7th respondent herein. The Tribunal held that the appellant Corporation is liable to satisfy the award. However in terms of the Judgment of the Supreme Court respondent No. 6 namely, the Insurance Company, the owner of the bus would become liable to satisfy the award. Counsel for respondent No. 6 does not dispute the said position. By the impugned Judgment & award the first respondent was held liable to pay compensation. The counsel for the appellant contends that the matter is covered by the Judgment of Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Coproration vs. Kulsum and Others (Civil Appeal no. 5901/2011 and Connected Appeals, disposed off on 25th July, 2011. In the said case the Hon''ble Supreme Court has held at para-45 as follows:-

45.

Thus, looking to the matter from every angle, we are of the considered opinion that Insurance Company cannot escape its liability of payment of compensation to Third Parties or claimants. Admittedly, owner of the vehicle has not violated any of the terms and conditions of the policy or provisions of the Act. The owner had taken the insurance so as to meet such type of liability which may arise on account of use of the vehicle.

Accordingly, the Judgment & award is modified to the extent of setting aside the order of the Tribunal holding respondent No. 1 liable to pay the compensation and not the appellant. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is liable to be satisfied by respondent No. 6 herein namely, the insurer of the owner of the bus. Appeal is disposed off accordingly. The amount in-deposit before this Court is directed to be refunded to the appellant.